Trump-appointed Sec. of Navy departs over differences with Commander in Chief over “rule of law” and “good order and discipline” (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

 

[wardorican]

I just assume you’ll somehow come out with a pro-bone spurs defense

You're a few hours late with that quip...

 

[Archies Ghost]

I saw a man on MSNBC who is the head of a veterans organization. He put it in a way that makes sense. He said that basically what Trump is doing is laying out a choice for service men and women. Loyalty to him or loyalty to their military code of behavior. (I’m paraphrasing.) He said the Defense Secretary chose loyalty to Trump and Spencer chose loyalty to the honor of the military. He said it’s tremendously damaging for the two to diverge and they are diverging because of Trump‘s actions in these cases.

And later I heard reporting that the Trump campaign plans to have these pardoned soldiers on stage with him at various rallies and potentially when he receives the nomination at the convention. So he sees them as props for his campaign essentially. Just reinforces my belief that the man doesn’t do anything that doesn’t benefit him personally or that he cannot exploit in some way.

Spencer proposing a fixed review board that gives Trump the result he wants is loyalty to military honor?

Esper firing him for doing it is loyalty to Trump?

I can understand someone taking issue with Trump's actions with regard to Gallagher and the others but its pretty clear that Spencer deserved to be fired.

I don't get the stubborn framing of everything in this manner.

 

[samiam5211]

The war criminal should be punished for what he said on Foxnews this past weekend. He trashed his chain of command in the media. That should be unacceptable for any service member.

It is worse IMO than what the Navy secretary is alleged to have done by jumping his chain of command to speak directly with Trump.

The war criminal is a stain on the military

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Spencer proposing a fixed review board that gives Trump the result he wants is loyalty to military honor?


I don't get the stubborn framing of everything in this manner.

Talk about framing things!

Spencer didn't propose fixing the review board, he just wanted them to have it. You know, follow their proper procedures. Spencer pointed out to the President, regardless of the results, trump still has the authority to do what he wants.

Point being, there's nothing for Spence r to fix, trump just did not want them to have a review board.

 

[Nebaghead]

This is such a cluster. Is a review board going to happen at all now or did the secretary of defense just give up. I agree with what has been said by Gallagher in interviews alone is enough for a court martial. I'm sure Trump will have him visiting the WH soon enough, yet a Marine vet who served honorably is deported.

 

[crosswatt]

This is such a cluster. Is a review board going to happen at all now or did the secretary of defense just give up. I agree with what has been said by Gallagher in interviews alone is enough for a court martial. I'm sure Trump will have him visiting the WH soon enough, yet a Marine vet who served honorably is deported.

From what I've read, Rear Admiral Collins still has the review board scheduled for December 2nd. Somehow the President forbade it on Twitter, the White House said proceed though the official channel, the Secretary of Defense said it wouldn't happen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs said it was a closed issue, but no where have I read that Collins and the other brass in the Special Warfare Command had cancelled it.

 

[Archies Ghost]

Talk about framing things!

Spencer didn't propose fixing the review board, he just wanted them to have it. You know, follow their proper procedures. Spencer pointed out to the President, regardless of the results, trump still has the authority to do what he wants.

Point being, there's nothing for Spence r to fix, trump just did not want them to have a review board.

Yes he did. He proposed to Trump that Gallagher would be allowed to retain his Trident on the condition that Trump allow the Trident review board to go forward.

Two choices here.

1. He was lying to Trump and had no intention of fixing the result.
2. He was intending to fix the result of review board.

Esper said Spencer had gone behind his back last week to propose a secret deal with the White House in which Spencer would fix the outcome of the Gallagher review. Esper said this was a violation of the military chain of command and said Spencer acknowledged his misstep.

https://www.registercitizen.com/news/article/Esper-says-Trump-ordered-him-to-allow-SEAL-to-14860834.php

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Yes he did. He proposed to Trump that Gallagher would be allowed to retain his Trident on the condition that Trump allow the Trident review board to go forward.

Two choices here.

1. He was lying to Trump and had no intention of fixing the result.
2. He was intending to fix the result of review board.

https://www.registercitizen.com/news/article/Esper-says-Trump-ordered-him-to-allow-SEAL-to-14860834.php

Read between the lines here, Esper was careful with his words and never said a fix was in, the term "fix" was added by the media. Esper's reasoning for firing Spencer is based on Spencer going to the White House and proposing a solution that does not undercut the Navy's regulations.

That proposal was to allow the review board to happen and if they ruled to remove Gallagher from the SEALS, the WH could just overrule their decision. Esper had already expressed to Spencer that the President did not want a review board but Spencer went to the WH anyway.

Esper ‘flabbergasted’ to learn of Navy secretary’s secret White House outreach about Navy SEAL | CNN Politics

Defense Secretary Mark Esper said he was “flabbergasted” to discover that then-Navy Secretary Richard Spencer had been working a White House back channel to resolve a standoff over controversial Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher.

www.cnn.com

Esper took pains to make clear that his decision to fire Spencer wasn't driven by the former Navy secretary's stance on Gallagher but was the result of Spencer's secret outreach to the White House.
"Contrary to the narrative that some want to put forward in the media, this dismissal is not about Eddie Gallagher, it's about Secretary Spencer and the chain of command," Esper said Monday.

"There have been at least three different versions of what happened," said John Kirby, a retired admiral who has served as both Pentagon and State Department spokesman.
Kirby noted that if Spencer were indeed "privately and behind Esper's back trying to arrange a fixed outcome" in Gallagher's case, it is "completely inappropriate for a service secretary to be trying to work an end run around the defense secretary in the halls of the White House."
"Part of the problem is that this administration doesn't have a reputation for honesty, and so we're still left to wonder exactly what the ticktock was here," Kirby said.

So, again, there were no reasons to "fix" the Navy's board as POTUS had made it clear that Gallagher will keep his Trident.

Btw, I understand that I am the one framing things now, but this framing is based off of public statements made by Spencer and Esper.

 

[MT15]

Yes he did. He proposed to Trump that Gallagher would be allowed to retain his Trident on the condition that Trump allow the Trident review board to go forward.

Two choices here.

1. He was lying to Trump and had no intention of fixing the result.
2. He was intending to fix the result of review board.

https://www.registercitizen.com/news/article/Esper-says-Trump-ordered-him-to-allow-SEAL-to-14860834.php

you left out a choice, that he never intended that the result be fixed. I still haven’t heard him say that, all I’ve heard him say is that he went to the president without informing his commanding officer, although he says the chief of staff was briefed before he went.

I‘m not knowledgeable to know for sure how the military code stuff goes, I was just trying to paraphrase what one veteran said about it on TV.

Knowing Trump and his loose relationship with the truth, I’m skeptical that the Navy Secretary proposed a “fixed“ review. Seems out of character.

 

[Dadsdream]

Hi, checking back in again.

Navy says review board will not look at case of SEAL Eddie Gallagher, who will retire

During certification courses to become a U.S. Army Adjutant General's Corps instructor/assessor at Fort Benjamin Harrison, we were often confronted with ethical dilemma scenarios.

A servicemember has died under questionable circumstances, but no foul play is found.

A. If you file the paperwork as a line-of-duty death, the spouse and children receive full benefits and the deceased is buried with full military honors. Full honors includes the spouse and children receiving clothing, hotel, travel and expenses for the funeral as well as group life insurance, housing and coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan for years to come.

B. If you file the paperwork as not line-of-duty, the spouse and children receive only enough benefits to bury the guy with no honors. That's it. No more.

Which set of paperwork do you file?

For death under questionable circumstances, the correct textbook answer is B.

For death under questionable circumstances, the "unofficial" guidance, spoken off-off-the-record, was A. If at all possible, you take care of the spouse and children to the maximum extent possible. The dead guy is dead. Take care of the survivors. Take care of your own.

See, it's not always about political shenanigans. Sometimes it's about people doing the right thing for the right reasons.

 

[crosswatt]

Hi, checking back in again.

Navy says review board will not look at case of SEAL Eddie Gallagher, who will retire

During certification courses to become a U.S. Army Adjutant General's Corps instructor/assessor at Fort Benjamin Harrison, we were often confronted with ethical dilemma scenarios.

A servicemember has died under questionable circumstances, but no foul play is found.

A. If you file the paperwork as a line-of-duty death, the spouse and children receive full benefits and the deceased is buried with full military honors. Full honors includes the spouse and children receiving clothing, hotel, travel and expenses for the funeral as well as group life insurance, housing and coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan for years to come.

B. If you file the paperwork as not line-of-duty, the spouse and children receive only enough benefits to bury the guy with no honors. That's it. No more.

Which set of paperwork do you file?

For death under questionable circumstances, the correct textbook answer is B.

For death under questionable circumstances, the "unofficial" guidance, spoken off-off-the-record, was A. If at all possible, you take care of the spouse and children to the maximum extent possible. The dead guy is dead. Take care of the survivors. Take care of your own.

For the record, the "unofficial" path is still often taken when a decent member of the government faces a hardship. So that proud and noble tradition remains.

See, it's not always about political shenanigans. Sometimes it's about people doing the right thing for the right reasons.

Or the wrong thing for the wrong reason. The SEALs are a mess, and the guy tasked to help clean it up was just kneecapped by his superior officers. I can only assume Rear Admiral Collins is out quietly as soon as this falls off the news cycle. Probably a January "want to spend time with my family" type thing.

And for what? Eddie Gallagher? Gallagher to me is like Vic Mackey from the Shield. He's just not a good dude, but apparently effective in the duties assigned to him. One of those guys you really don't ever want to find out how they got the job done, and who hascost some people their careers for his tactics.

Way too much attention has been paid to him, especially considering the usual hush that surrounds all things SOCOM. Going on TV as much as he has is just out of character for the culture, and how he felt free to completely trash his superiors is a pretty big middle finger to centuries of military tradition.

He is, in my opinion, like 90% stepping into some analyst gig at Fox News as soon as his retirement is completed. I just can't see all of this as just wanting to "let him go back to his family".

Also, I wonder if the other three are still on the hook for that review board meeting on the 2nd without him?

 

[MT15]

He will be given rock star treatment at Trump rallies. That’s my prediction, anyway. Credible testimony that he used to snipe 12 year old girls and old men for fun, IIRC.

 

[insidejob]

Why would one even do so, does he not trust the ability and jurisdiction of military courts? If so, it seems like a much bigger problem than one soldier's case.

Because he "Knows more than the Generals."

 

[Archies Ghost]

Read between the lines here, Esper was careful with his words and never said a fix was in, the term "fix" was added by the media. Esper's reasoning for firing Spencer is based on Spencer going to the White House and proposing a solution that does not undercut the Navy's regulations.

That proposal was to allow the review board to happen and if they ruled to remove Gallagher from the SEALS, the WH could just overrule their decision. Esper had already expressed to Spencer that the President did not want a review board but Spencer went to the WH anyway.

Esper ‘flabbergasted’ to learn of Navy secretary’s secret White House outreach about Navy SEAL | CNN Politics

Defense Secretary Mark Esper said he was “flabbergasted” to discover that then-Navy Secretary Richard Spencer had been working a White House back channel to resolve a standoff over controversial Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher.

www.cnn.com

So, again, there were no reasons to "fix" the Navy's board as POTUS had made it clear that Gallagher will keep his Trident.

Btw, I understand that I am the one framing things now, but this framing is based off of public statements made by Spencer and Esper.

Here is the quote from the piece directly attributing the word fix to Esper

Esper said Spencer had gone behind his back last week to propose a secret deal with the White House in which Spencer would fix the outcome of the Gallagher review.

Esper says Trump ordered him to stop SEAL review board

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Mark Esper declared Monday that President Donald Trump ordered him to stop a disciplinary review of a Navy SEAL accused of battlefield misconduct, an intervention that raised questions about America’s commitment to international standards for battlefield ethics.

apnews.com

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Here is the quote from the piece directly attributing the word fix to Esper

Esper says Trump ordered him to stop SEAL review board

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Mark Esper declared Monday that President Donald Trump ordered him to stop a disciplinary review of a Navy SEAL accused of battlefield misconduct, an intervention that raised questions about America’s commitment to international standards for battlefield ethics.

apnews.com

Dude, is that a direct quote from Esper or is it a summary of what was said? I will take everything back and offer my apologies if you can show a direct quote from Esper saying that Spencer was "fixing" anything?

 

[samiam5211]

Dude, is that a direct quote from Esper or is it a summary of what was said? I will take everything back and offer my apologies if you can show a direct quote from Esper saying that Spencer was "fixing" anything?

I am not sure I’d believe it until I hear it from Spencer anyway.

No one who works from this administration should be taken at their word.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

I am not sure I’d believe it until I hear it from Spencer anyway.

No one who works from this administration should be taken at their word.

Everything about these clemencies have been clouded with double talk from the administration and that includes Esper's opinions on the matter. In particular, both Esper and Spencer had expressed their apprehension in granting clemency to Gallagher, but when faced with the President's insistence that they comply, Esper capitulated and Spencer stood his ground.

 

[MT15]

Here is the quote from the piece directly attributing the word fix to Esper

Esper says Trump ordered him to stop SEAL review board

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Mark Esper declared Monday that President Donald Trump ordered him to stop a disciplinary review of a Navy SEAL accused of battlefield misconduct, an intervention that raised questions about America’s commitment to international standards for battlefield ethics.

apnews.com

I don’t think anyone doubts that the media reported it that way. I’m doubting that Spencer would have offered to fix the review, since he is standing on principles otherwise.

Even if Esper did say it, I would want to know where Esper heard that was what Spencer said.